Trump got elected because of immigration of all types. His tariffs reflect America First policy. He is a populist, and he believes in the common things, as Joe Six Pack does. Bernie Sanders is a populist as well, but he is a socialist. In both cases, the voter is thinking that the system has failed, or is failing. The Bernie supporter believes capitalism has failed, and the Trump supporter believes that liberal economics has failed. In both cases, they want what they think is “fairness”. They both believe there is a zero-sum game, and the pie is shrinking, or not distributed evenly, and that we are reaching some kind of peak that will usher in decline. Both sides believe their country is in decline. I am not saying the US does not have problems, but the liberal elites failed to address the issue of living costs and in my opinion, general price increase while having a foreign policy that seems to disconnect them from domestic issues. Both sides will have suicidal policies, thinking they will address the problem, that is free trade, and lack of sufficient wealth redistribution. Why did you think Obama ran on “hope and change”? He himself is a liberal that ran on America being on the decline.

I suspect they don’t know what fascism is. Fascism is nationalism, corporatism, and authoritarianism. Almost all political movements are about fear. Climate alarmist fear global warming, communist fear capitalism, if there was no fear, then there would be no anxiety, or worry. Democrats feared Donald Trump. Most of the world is nationalist, including Ukraine. Israel is nationalist. China is nationalist. Japan is nationalist. The list goes on and on. The world is structured as nation-states for a reason. Donald Trump is a nationalist, that doesn’t necessarily make him a fascist. He is a populist, that is why he won. Kamala Harris/Joe Biden 2.0 didn’t win because she is not a populist, she wanted people to vote for her, so she can tell them how the world should.

The paradox of the progressive is the support of unions, which are the very constituents that would prefer nationalism, and anti-immigration. Joe Biden did poorly on the immigration front. When you have unions and bus drivers deciding policy for your country, you will have a dysfunctional state in the future. To the democrat who says, finally democracy is working, the people are leading policy, not elites.

Well, why do you not have any friends? At least Zuckerberg is trying to make you feel good about yourself.

You obviously missed the context entirely.

The study the article is talking about, is a possible solution to cover California’s solar energy glut problem during the day, because the state doesn’t have enough batteries. It is a case study. In trying to do that, it may create other problems, such as infrastructure to get people to charge their cars during the day while they work. This means employers must pay or get somebody to pay for chargers at the work place, adding onto more costs onto the employee and/or employer. Nighttime charging may be cheaper and more convenient, but remember, the study wants you to capture all the wonder solar power during the day, not use potential green house gases from natural gas at night. The more complexity, the more problems you have.

The Hill tries to make backup energy as something that brings volatility and rolling blackouts, which makes no sense. Implying they believe that wind and solar should go without backup, and consistent generation at night, which is basically extra capacity. If you are going to need to roll out back up generation in the future, might as well do it now, instead of later. This does a couple of things for the Texas GOP goal of increasing reliability, it increases the responsibility on solar and wind producers to address their own volatility, instead of dumping the volatility on ancillary services, which get less revenue, because of their off-time, accommodating wind and solar. By forcing solar, and wind producers to buy capacity from what would most think as only backup generation, the Legislature wants to force wind, and solar to participate in 24 hour production. A mandate like this makes room for reliable energy rollout, basically more support for natural gas, and presumably batteries, instead of just crowding out the preferred energy types.

I don’t think the author of this article understands what he wrote about, or purposely omitting key things about grid balancing. The problem with rooftop solar incentives is they encourage solar production during the day when the sun is out, but do nothing when the sun settles. California has to switch to other types of energy such as batteries, natural gas plants, etc. for the evening. The grid is already saturated with energy during the day, even into negative prices. Utilities are paying into these rooftops, perhaps at retail prices, for something that does not address the energy gaps through the 24-hour timeline of power generation. In simple terms, California’s rooftop solar does not balance out the system over a timescale, with diminishing returns. At least, the article was stamped as an opinion piece, increasing the likelihood of it being a biased article that delves into conspiracy theories that California, and its regulated utility companies just want to screw people. There you go.

Mexico has nothing else better to do.

What does that have to do with this article?

4 years later, it would be as if nothing happened, and life goes on. Well, goodbye.

That’s your problem, not mine, and what is the fairy tale behind human rights? I didn’t know that AI could be consciously racist.

You need to pay up for your speed racing.

Democrats need to move to Canada, and Republicans to a red state in the US.

deleted by creator

Nuclear power is federally regulated. Nuclear power could always be private, and government entities could own them too.

One example is municipalities having a stake in nuclear energy: Nuclear power is obtained for our customers via the South Texas Project (STP) located in Bay City, Texas. CPS Energy owns a 40 percent stake in STP (NRG Energy of Texas owns 44 percent, while Austin Energy owns 16 percent). STP units 1 and 2 generate 1,029 megawatts of power for our customers.

In a liberal political system, how does that work without discrimination against other religions is a question. If they decide yay, does that mean Madrassas could be funded too? Or is this an anti-liberal decision on purpose that aligns closer to a nationalist agenda? Religion is important. It is the underpinning of people’s belief system. Without Christianity, there would be no liberalism.

Human rights aren’t Chinese culture. Humanos derechos is a Christian concept that lead to ending slavery. Confucianism is about the relationship between the superior, and the inferior, or father/son relationship, and that is paralleled throughout Chinese society, including government. Christian cultures are egalitarian, Confucian culture is not egalitarian.

Marriage wasn’t a sacred union. Christianity made marriage sacred. By making the sex partners exclusive to each other according to the teachings of Apostle Paul. Marriage was used as a political tool to bind with other clans or tribes. Marriages were arranged based on political and economical expediency, not based on love. Christianity by way of controlling who can marry dismantled the clan system by denying arranged marriages. As a result, it created the nuclear family that is seen today. The clan-based system was controlled by a powerful patriarch that could decide the fate of life and death of all those under his household, or property. Even today, the elders of the family control marriages according to what they believe is best in some parts of the world. Christianity gave young people the freedom to marry who they want. Nobody is forcing them to marry.

Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump are not serious candidates. They’re not going to make the country better, instead will introduce a whole set of other problems. These candidates gain power by votes as a form of protest. In a hypothetical, going to fascism from liberalism to communism does not improve the country in a weighted average, instead it will get worse. I have a hypothesis as to why democrats can’t dominate Florida. That is, tax and spend policies does not work in Florida. It is a low tax state, probably for good reason, because much of the state is in a hurricane zone. It has a semi-retirement atmosphere. You would be paying high taxes on top of housing costs if you implemented a New York style taxes. Florida style taxation is tax things that are tourist related, to keep taxes low for the rest of the locals.

I fail to see how Yahoo will make Chrome better. I guess in the name of competition.